darra Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Talking about this on the radio this morning. Also talked about Chelsea and the fact that although their youth teams have won the youth cup on numerous occasions very few if any have gone on to make it or become household names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Etchesketch Posted September 19, 2017 Author Share Posted September 19, 2017 We will buy again 100%. The only time I remember an exception to this was Man Utd in the mid 90s. They sold Hughes, Ince and Kanchelskis one summer but didn;t buy anyone to replace them. Instead they replaced them with Beckham, Scholes, Butt etc-A once in a lifetime batch of young players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookeh Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 1 hour ago, Great Big Galaa said: We obviously don't have a director of football at the moment but it's been suggested on here several times that our footballing philosophy from the top goes right through to the bottom which suggests this will be taken into account when we at some stage in the future replace Carlos as Head Coach or surely it's pointless having the practices we currently have in place? I think it will, yeah. Like, I doubt we'll ever have Allardyce as our Head Coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonesy87shef Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Academy and under a certain age group rules need a complete overhaul Teams like chelsea and Man U can hoard players. Should be a maximum number of players allowed at a certain age group. With this rule I'm talking more 17-21 year olds. As for academies. What's the point in some clubs having them? Nurture a talent for years, only to have them poached by premier league clubs for a pittance. That rule alone needs to be changed completely. Then there's also if you're lucky enough tie down a scholar to a pro contract for a year or two you will lose them anyway at a tribunal, again for pennies. So I reiterate what's the point in most clubs having academies. It might even by an idea to follow something of an American model where their college players don't earn, or we can have a nationwide wage cap on players of a certain age. We look to be losing Hirst because we can't compete. Seems completely unfair to me, but in the grand scheme of things we've gotten away with our youngsters being poached, mainly because they weren't good enough. So to sum up Salary caps for U21's Max number of players U21's Raiae compensation and tribunal fees That would help the football league and also young players as they will be forced down the football ladder not rotting in the under 23's and starting their career in their mid 20's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigrbuk Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Sheffield kids just need to get better at football. Pull your fingers out lads 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emerson Thome Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 4 hours ago, Etchesketch said: I just think the 'only Premier League player we have produced' is a poor barometer to use for a club like Huddrsfield. Over the last twenty years a lot of clubs who have been in the Football League, like ours, have not produced Premier League players. They have a decent record with producing EFL players though. That should be their barometer. I agree. What's more, judging an academy in just transfer fees is a very short-sighted measure. A football club should be rooted in the local community. Bringing on talented young footballers and spreading football in the community should be part of the wider mission of the club. What's more, even if the majority of the players don't make it hopefully you are bringing through dozens of youngsters with an affinity for the club who will then pay to watch for the next 60+ years. Every kid who attends a match will dream of being out there on the pitch one day, and for a club to send out a signal that it doesn't care and doesn't want to engage is very bad in my opinion. It breaks a bond between the grassroots and the first team. Plus, in an era of ridiculously inflated transfer fees it would only take one John Stones or Kyle Walker to pay for the academy for the next 10+ years (as we're a bigger club than our neighbours down the road we wouldn't have had to sell them at 18 but could have waited until the transfer fee was a lot higher, but even then, both clubs got a large chunk of subsequent transfers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfsmith Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, pazowl55 said: Southampton's though being one exception to the rule. An academy headed by Martin Hunter who is a Sheffield lad and great friends of Howard Wilkinson (and Dicky Bate for those that remember him). Pity no one ever approached Martin to come and do the same for us 'back home' in Sheffield. Edited September 19, 2017 by wilfsmith self correct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scram Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 The academy system is broken - hopelessly so The Huddersfield decision is just another example of that - following on from Brentford recently too It's what the FA/PL kind of always wanted - the make it elitist in order to give free reign to their "darling clubs" - ie the big 6 I could go on forever about this but broadly i agree with the Huddersfield/Brentford approach - there has to be a point at which a club audits it's spending and if a part of the club is significantly underperforming then of course remedial action is needed - if it's about being a presence in the community then spend more on the community activity of the club. And if somebody can tell me how signing youngsters from Bulgaria et al is firming up our presence in the community then i'm all ears... The EPPP is based on the "Long Term Athletic Development" model (LATD) - and also took from the ridiculously flawed "10,000 hours" concept - it's been long established that the 10,000 hour concept does not apply to any type of athletic/physical development - but hell, the FA decided to base their entire process on the completely flawed and discredited model. And the FA being the FA the more they tried to "fix" it - the more ridiculous it gets Study after study has shown the folly of early specialisation in football - yet the good old FA wants our kids to specialise ever-younger - clubs are recruiting from 5 years old There are sooooo many errors and inherent dangers (which will become clearer with the longitudinal studies in the coming years - studies also show how many athletes/players who choose to specialise later on are more likely to become elite and suffer less of the problems that early starters suffer from I used to be a huge exponent of academy football - but i'm not an ostrich and i can see the massive flaws with it And here's the kicker...our kids start younger, train much longer, have better facilities, have way more coaching input - yet the current England team is as bad as we've had in my 50+ years watching football The whole FA system is wrong from inception to delivery - it was badly set up originally - and each change has made it successfully worse until we've arrived at the huge white elephant we now have - where a premier league club no longer sees the value in having a youth development system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scram Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 4 hours ago, darra said: Talking about this on the radio this morning. Also talked about Chelsea and the fact that although their youth teams have won the youth cup on numerous occasions very few if any have gone on to make it or become household names. I think quite a few have gone onto decent careers And it is likely to be an earner for the club too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldishowl Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 This must mean less chance of English players breaking through as fewer will get a chance to start with. A Premier League club with all the income they get should be forced to put a percentage into running an academy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Etchesketch Posted September 19, 2017 Author Share Posted September 19, 2017 5 hours ago, darra said: Talking about this on the radio this morning. Also talked about Chelsea and the fact that although their youth teams have won the youth cup on numerous occasions very few if any have gone on to make it or become household names. A lot of the Chelsea players will have good careers but it wont be with Chelsea. Chalobah has joined Watford and got in the England squad. Dont know why Loftus Cheek and the like go out on loan because it wont help there case to get in the Chelsea side. It just puts value on them so they can be sold on. Chelsea seem happy using the academy this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socialist_Owl Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Really shortsighted move for a club that's evidently banking on staying up for awhile. Good luck with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socialist_Owl Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 2 hours ago, Etchesketch said: A lot of the Chelsea players will have good careers but it wont be with Chelsea. Chalobah has joined Watford and got in the England squad. Dont know why Loftus Cheek and the like go out on loan because it wont help there case to get in the Chelsea side. It just puts value on them so they can be sold on. Chelsea seem happy using the academy this way. Nathan Ake and Tammy Abraham also come to mind... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Etchesketch Posted September 19, 2017 Author Share Posted September 19, 2017 19 minutes ago, Socialist_Owl said: Nathan Ake and Tammy Abraham also come to mind... Yes I'm 99% certain Abrahams will never be Chelsea's main centre forward. Could well have a great career but it won't be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owlsman82 Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 Don't think it's a bad idea at all with them still keeping the U18 and U23 squads. I bet there is massive turnover with all the younger age groups anyway with hardly any making it all the way through, so why not just pick them up at an older age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scram Posted September 19, 2017 Share Posted September 19, 2017 5 hours ago, Etchesketch said: A lot of the Chelsea players will have good careers but it wont be with Chelsea. Chalobah has joined Watford and got in the England squad. Dont know why Loftus Cheek and the like go out on loan because it wont help there case to get in the Chelsea side. It just puts value on them so they can be sold on. Chelsea seem happy using the academy this way. Of course they're happy using the academy that way - it earns them money, allows them to stockpile some of the best young talent in the world and gives them the best chance of getting a prospect through to their first team It's incredibly difficult to develop players to get into the very best teams - by default the players have to be among the very best available It also sets up players to have decent careers in the game - so its ticks most of the boxes - and the one box it struggles to tick is the same for most clubs in the world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scram Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 17 hours ago, Owlsman82 said: Don't think it's a bad idea at all with them still keeping the U18 and U23 squads. I bet there is massive turnover with all the younger age groups anyway with hardly any making it all the way through, so why not just pick them up at an older age. I think more and more clubs are seeing the value of this - even though most haven't yet taken the ultimate step of binning off their academy But overnight i'd bin off the pre-academy and foundation phases (5-11 basically) - i mean what is the point in the vast, vast majority of cases? Nobody on earth can spot players at the age who will definitely go on to a top level career - and the chances are that any outstanding talents at that age will get picked off by the vultures anyway... I'd make it illegal for clubs to offer incentives to any players under 11 years old - with real and punitive measures if they transgressed - up to and including docking first team points as well as huge fines. It's for a 3-fold effect - one is to stop the ridiculous horse trading in the hopes and dreams of thousands of kids who won't make the grade 2, it would also save money for the clubs to utilise elsewhere The other and probably most important effect (imo) would be to allow kids to remain kids and play uninhibited football for the love of doing it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adelphi1867 Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 WE, as a club, do not have a history of producing our own players, preferring to try to purchase either success or safety. This has been our downfall before in our past, and we MUST spend more time and finances on improving the set up, scouting and coaching at Academy level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malek Posted September 20, 2017 Share Posted September 20, 2017 I think it is key to set path to the first team for young players defined by set of targets that must be achieved in order to progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now